THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK RESPONDENT v. CHRISTOPHER WRIGHT DEFENDANT APPELLANT (2010)

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT, v. CHRISTOPHER WRIGHT, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

KA 09-02175

Decided: December 30, 2010

PRESENT: MARTOCHE, J.P., CENTRA, FAHEY, LINDLEY, AND SCONIERS, JJ.

TYSON BLUE, MACEDON, FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. RICHARD M. HEALY, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, LYONS (JACQUELINE MCCORMICK OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: On appeal from a judgment convicting him, upon his plea of guilty, of grand larceny in the third degree (Penal Law former § 155.35), defendant contends that County Court erred in failing to conduct a restitution hearing. Defendant failed to preserve that contention for our review “inasmuch as he failed to object to the amount of restitution at sentencing or to request a hearing with respect thereto” (People v. Jorge N.T., 70 AD3d 1456, 1457, lv denied 14 NY3d 889; see People v. Marvin, 68 AD3d 1729, lv denied 14 NY3d 842). Furthermore, defendant waived that contention because he expressly consented to the amount of restitution imposed (see People v. Brown, 70 AD3d 1378; People v. Vogel, 20 AD3d 865, appeal dismissed 6 NY3d 728). The sentence is not unduly harsh or severe.

Patricia L. Morgan

Clerk of the Court

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network